MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206264696 · doi:10.1038/s41598-021-03872-x

Evaluation of qPCR reference genes for taimen (Hucho taimen) under heat stress

2022· article· en· W4206264696 on OpenAlexaff

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicMolecular Biology Techniques and Applications
Canadian institutionsMinistry of Agriculture
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReference genesGeneRibosomal proteinHeat shock proteinGene expressionRibosomal RNA18S ribosomal RNAHeat shock

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

As a powerful and attractive method for detecting gene expression, qRT-PCR has been broadly used in aquaculture research. Understanding the biology of taimen (Hucho taimen) has drawn increasing interest because of its ecological and economic value. Stable reference genes are required for the reliable quantification of gene expression, but such genes have not yet been optimized for taimen. In this study, the stability levels of 10 commonly used candidate reference genes were evaluated using geNorm, NormFinder, BestKeeper, and RefFinder. The expression levels of the 10 genes were detected using 240 samples from 48 experimental groups consisting of 40 individuals treated under four heat-stress conditions (18, 20, 22, and 24 °C) for 24 h and 26 °C for 4, 24, 48, and 72 h. Six tissues (blood, heart, brain, gill, skin, and liver) were collected from each individual. Ribosomal protein S29 (RPS29) and ribosomal protein L19 (RPL19) were the most stable genes among all of the samples, whereas 28S ribosomal RNA (28S rRNA), attachment region binding protein (ARBP), and 18S ribosomal RNA (18S rRNA) were the least stable. These results were verified by an expression analysis of taimen heat-stress genes (heat shock protein 60, hsp60, and heat shock protein 70, hsp70). In conclusion, RPS29 and RPL19 are the optimal reference genes for qRT-PCR analyses of taimen, irrespective of the tissue and experimental conditions. These results allow the reliable study of gene expression in taimen.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.115
Threshold uncertainty score0.375

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.291 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicMolecular Biology Techniques and ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207